Comments must constitute criminal contempt as defined by the Act of 1971 to warrant legal action.

ORDER :

Ramesh Sinha, J.

1. When the matter was called out for hearing, petitioner in person is not present physically or through virtual mode. No representation is made. However, the Contemnors-Respondent No.1-Badshah Prasad Singh, Respondent No.2-Somnath Verma and Respondent No.3-Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani are present in person.

2. The present contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Sections 12 and 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter called as ‘Act of 1971’) for initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against the respondents / contemnors who are guilty of noticeably making scurrilous, offensive, intimidatory and malicious remarks against the Selection Committee to designate Senior Advocate.

3. Contemnor No.1 has filed a writ petition bearing WPC No.4416/2021 (Badshah Prasad Singh v. High Court of Chhattisgarh and 12 others) on 27.10.2021 for setting aside the notification No.5333/SCDSA/2021 dated 14.06.2021 whereby in exercise of powers conferred under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961 read with Rule 7 of the High Court of Chhattisgarh (Designation of Senior Advocates) Rules, 2018 and in pursuance of the judgment of the Supreme Court dated 12.10.2017 in Indira Jaising vs. Supreme Court of India reported in 2017 (9) SCC 766, this Court in its Full Court meeting dated 11.06.2021 has resolved to designate twelve Advocates as Senior Advocates. The contention of contemnor No.1 in the said writ petition was that the Selection Committee to designate the Senior Advocate has adopted non transparent and arbitrary procedure to give benefit to their own relatives and known people and has done arbitrariness, bias, nepotism and has taken unconstitutional process in designation of Senior Advocate.

4. This is willful contempt because Badshah Prasad Singh has participated in the process of the High Court of Chhatisgarh (Designation of Senior Advocates) Rules, 2018. It is very surprising that a person who claim himself to be designated as Senior Advocate is either not aware about the law with regard to any selection process, appearance in selection process and the way of challenge of selection process.

5. In the instant contempt petition, the petitioner has made an allegation against respondent No.1/Contemnor No.1 that he has called a press conference wherein he has made derogatory and disparaging remarks against the Selection Committee to designate Senior Advocate, which is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:-

The petitioner has also made an allegation against respondent No.2/Contemnor No.2 that he has made derogatory and disparaging remarks against the Selection Committee to designate Senior Advocate which is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:-

6. It has been pleaded that the Advocates who have been arrayed as respondents / contemnors had convened press conference which scandalizes the judges and the High Court and lower down the image of the Institution. Consequently, it would be within the ambit of criminal contempt for scandalizing the Court and the judges. It has been further pleaded that since Advocate General (Shri Satish Chandra Verma) who in person was designated as Senior Advocate, in his capacity as Advocate General, as such the consent of Advocate General in writing may be dispensed with as required under Section 15 (1) (b) of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

7. Respondents No.1 and 2 have filed their reply stating inter-alia that the petitioner is not practicing Advocate. He has not passed examination held by the Bar Council of India. Unless and until pass such examination, he cannot be treated as an Advocate. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate, has been made a party without alleging anything against him only to intend injure him in the society only on account of the fact that he was the counsel of contemnor No.1-Mr.B.P.Singh in WPC No.4416/2021, which was filed by him challenging the notification dated 14.06.2021. As such, the petit